DIT (E) v. Lovely Bal Shiksha Parishad

Surti Chemicals P.Ltd, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-24(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2013-14

…e to allow the position to be changed in a subsequent year. The principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Radhasoami Satsang vs. CIT (supra) has been applied by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Director of Income-tax vs. Lovely Bal Shiksha Parishad [266 ITR 349 (Del)]. Rule of consistency has to be followed as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Narendra Doshi [254 ITR 606 (SC)]. 7.2 The assessee categorically denied receipt of rent over and above what is reflected in its books of accounts. Nothing has been brought on record to contradict the version of the assessee either by the learned AO or…

ACIT (E), New Delhi vs. Dlf Qutab Enclave Complex Educational Charitable Trust, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhudr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 3260/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Asstt. Commissioner Of Vs M/S Dlf Qutab Enclave Complex Educational Charitable Trust, 9Th Income Tax(E), Circle-1(1), New Delhi-110002 Floor, Dlf Centre, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaatd0852D Assessee By : Sh. R. S. Singhvi, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 12.12.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.12.2019

…1990-91 to 1998-99. On the basis of this chart, the argument of assessee s counsel was that as per the rule of consistency also, the claim of the assessee deserves to be allowed. In the case of Director of Income Tax vs. lovely Bal Shiksha Parisad reported in 266 ITR 349, following the decision of apex Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs. CIT 193 ITR 321, it was held that if there was no change in the nature of activities and the assessee was granted exemption under section 10(22) of the Income Tax Act not only in respect of earlier years but subsequent years also, the assessee was entitled to claim exempt…

M/S Cargo Motors Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Joginder Singh, Assessment Year: 2012-13 Cargo Motors Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, 1/9-B, Jindal House, Circle-5(2), बनाम/ Asaf Ali Road, C.R. Building, Vs. Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110002 ("नधा%&रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaacc2744C

…maintained. Reliance was placed upon the decision in Sood Harvester (2007) 164 taxman 55, Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT vs Lagan Kala Upvan 259 ITR 489 and DIT vs Lovely Bal Shiksha Parishad (2004) 3 ITA No. 4439/Del./2015 Cargo Motors Pvt Ltd. 266 ITR 349. This assertion of the Ld. counsel for the assessee was not controverted by the Revenue. However, the Ld. DR, Shri Kaushlendra Tiwari, contended that some expenses in the form of administration might have been incurred, therefore, the AO was within a jurisdiction to make disallowance. 2.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused t…

Dy.Dir. of I.T vs. Shanti Devi Progressive Edu.Socy

…allowed that position to be sustained by not challenging the order, it would not at all be appropriate to allow the position to be changed in the subsequent years. A similar view has been taken in Director of Income Tax v. Lovely Bal Shiksha Parishad; 266 ITR 349 (Delhi), Director of Income Tax (Exemption) v. Moti Bagh Mutual Aid Education; 298 ITR 190 (Delhi) and Director of Income Tax (Exemption) v. Manav Bharti Institute of Child Education; 163 Taxman 50 (Delhi). 24. Learned counsel for the respondent/assessee also strongly relied upon the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Directo…